Summary: We found fault in the way the Council completed remedial actions recommended and agreed during the statutory children’s complaint process. This caused the complainant (Mrs X) injustice. The Council agreed to apologise and make a payment to recognise Mrs X’s distress and her time and trouble.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council:
• Took away from her care her grandson (Y) for whom at the time she held a Special Guardianship Order;
• Failed to involve her in the decisions about Y’s health and care;
• For a long time failed to allow her any contact with Y;
• Failed to complete the Independent Review Panel recommendations made during stage three of the statutory children’s complaint procedure.
2. Mrs X says the Council’s failings caused her prolonged distress and anxiety about Y’s health and well-being.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. During my investigation Mrs X provided evidence of her continuing communication with the Council and her difficulties in getting more involved with Y. These, however, were not part of Mrs X’s original complaint which the Council considered through its statutory children’s complaint process. I have, therefore, focused my investigation on deciding whether, when investigating Mrs X’s complaint, the Council complied with:
• legislation on the statutory children’s complaint process;
• recommendations of the Review Panel.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. If a council has investigated something under the statutory children’s complaint process, the Ombudsman would not normally re-investigate it unless we consider the investigation was flawed. However, we may look at whether a council properly considered the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation.
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I reviewed all the documents sent by Mrs X and by the Council.
7. I reviewed our Guidance on Remedies.
8. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
9. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative framework

10. The law sets out a three-stage procedure for councils to follow when looking at complaints about children’s social care services. The accompanying statutory guidance, ‘Getting the Best from Complaints’, explains councils’ responsibilities in more detail.
11. The first stage of the procedure is local resolution. Councils have up to 20 working days to respond.
12. If a complainant is not happy with a council’s stage one response, they can ask for it to be considered at stage two. At this stage of the procedure, councils appoint an investigator and an independent person who is responsible for overseeing the investigation. Councils have up to 13 weeks to complete stage two of the process from the date of request.
13. If a complainant is unhappy with the outcome of the stage two investigation, they can ask for a stage three review by an independent panel. The council must hold the panel within 30 days of the date of request, and then issue a final response within 20 days of the panel hearing.
14. Councils can refuse to consider a complaint if a complainant says they intend to take legal action or if investigating a complaint could prejudice concurrent court proceedings. However, after the proceedings have ended, a complainant can resubmit the complaint for the council to consider.

What happened

15. In this part I did not include everything that happened and was investigated under the statutory children’s complaint process but only the facts which are relevant to my decision.
16. From 2008 till September 2021 Mrs X was a Special Guardian for her grandson Y. In mid-January 2020 the Council removed Y from Mrs X’s care, placing him first with family members, then with foster carers and finally in a residential home. In the beginning of April the Court issued an Interim Care Order for Y.
17. A few weeks later Mrs X complained to the Council about:
• The way Y was removed from her care in January 2020;
• The Council not consulting her about Y’s subsequent placements;
• The lack of notice about the assault on Y in his residential home;
• Giving Y medication without consulting her when she was still holding parental responsibility for Y.
18. The Council responded to this complaint in the first week of May.
19. Mrs X was not happy with the Council’s response and asked for her complaint to be escalated to stage two. The Council told Mrs X that due to the care proceedings it would not continue to look into her complaint until the proceedings end.
20. In September 2021 the care proceedings ended with the court revoking Mrs X’s Special Guardianship Order.
21. In the beginning of January 2022 Mrs X complained the Council failed to tell her of Y contracting COVID and about proposed changes to the contact arrangements.
22. Two weeks later Mrs X chased the Council’s response to her complaint. She also told the Council she was dissatisfied with the lack of resolution to her previous complaint, suspended during the care proceedings.
23. At the end of January the Council responded to Mrs X new complaint.
24. As Mrs X was not happy with the result of her second complaint, the Council appointed an Investigating Officer to consider both Mrs X’s complaints at stage two at the same time.
25. In mid-March Mrs X accepted a list of issues identified by the Investigating Officer, who issued his report a month later. The report was overseen and signed off by an Independent Person.
26. At the end of April the Council sent Mrs X an Adjudication letter based on the Investigating Officer’s report, accepting its findings and offering remedies. The letter included advice about Mrs X’s right to have her complaint reviewed by a Review Panel.
27. Mrs X asked for a review of her complaint. A few days after a meeting, in mid-July the Review Panel issued the final report.
28. In the beginning of August the Council sent Mrs X its response to the Review Panel’s findings and recommendations. It explained it had already completed some recommendations and provided the details of the proposed actions for the others.
29. Mrs X complained to us in mid-August.
30. In the beginning of October the Council met Mrs X to discuss any continuing issues and completion of the outstanding recommendations. These were:
• Securing a signed statement from Y’s mother granting Mrs X a delegated authority;
• Compensation still not paid.
31. Two weeks after the meeting the Council explained to Mrs X in writing her contact arrangements with Y for a year. It named the dates of the sessions which have already taken place and the date for the next meeting. The Council complied with Mrs X’s request to change a contact centre for her meetings with Y.
32. Throughout October Mrs X kept asking the Council to pay her compensation. After the exchange of many emails the Council paid it in the first week of November.

Analysis

The Council’s complaint process

33. When investigating Mrs X’s complaints the Council correctly applied the statutory children’s complaint process. Looking into Mrs X’s first complaint was suspended during the care proceedings, which was legitimate. Responding to Mrs X’s request after the end of these court proceedings, the Council arranged for Mrs X’s complaint to be investigated at stage two jointly with her second complaint.
34. The stage two investigation report and the Review Panel report dealt with all the issues raised by Mrs X, contained factual findings based on the written and oral evidence and provided recommendations for all the failings identified in the way the Council carried out its duties. For these reasons I decided not to re-investigate any issues as explained under paragraph four of this decision.
35. When investigating Mrs X’s complaint there were some delays within stage two and stage three but they were not significant enough to cause injustice to Mrs X.

Review Panel recommendations

36. The Review Panel upheld or partly upheld most of the issues of Mrs X’s complaints. The recommendations of the independent members of the Panel seem reasonable and proportionate. They reflect consideration given to identified Council’s failings and their impact on Mrs X.
37. When reviewing the Council’s offer of £500 to Mrs X, I referred to our Guidance on Remedies. The payment is meant as a symbolic token for distress experienced because of the Council’s failings. The sum offered by the Council is already within a higher range, suitable for cases where the distress was severe or prolonged.
38. The Council’s failings caused Mrs X uncertainty, frustration and anxiety about Y. The main cause of Mrs X’s frustration and anxiety, however, was discontinuation of her involvement with Y and removal of her right to decide about his health, education and well-being rather than any of the Council’s failings, which is shown by her continued distress even after the court issued the Interim Care Order.

Timescales for completion of the recommendations

39. The Council completed most of the Review Panel recommendations, both for personal remedies and service improvements, in a timely manner.
40. The Council unreasonably delayed paying Mrs X the £500, which is fault. The Council accepted it would pay it to Mrs X in the beginning of August 2022. It is not clear why it took three months and many reminders from Mrs X to get the payment completed. The delay cannot be justified even allowing for some technical difficulties.
41. The Council’s delays with completing the payment caused further distress to Mrs X, who had already waited for a long time for resolving her complaints. She also spent much time chasing the payment.
42. Getting a signed form from Y’s birth mother to authorise Mrs X to act on her behalf was discussed at the meeting in the beginning of October 2022. The delay in preparing this document cannot be seen as the Council’s failing as it was outside its control.

Back to top

Agreed action

43. To remedy the injustice caused by the fault identified, we recommend the Council within four weeks of my final decision complete the following:
• Send a written apology to Mrs X;
• Pay Mrs X £100 to recognise her distress as well as time and trouble spent on chasing the Council for the payment.

The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

44. I partly uphold this complaint. I found fault in the way the Council completed remedial actions recommended during the statutory children’s complaint investigation. The Council has accepted my recommendations so this investigation is now at an end.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman